+1 (502) 904-2126   One Westbrook Corporate Center, Suite 300, Westchester, IL 60154, USA   Site Map
ISSN: 2574 -1241

Impact Factor : 0.548

  Submit Manuscript

Research ArticleOpen Access

Computerized Reporting In Colonoscopy: A Simple Way to Reduce Inadequate Preparation Rate and Improve Quality Indicator Compliance

Volume 2 - Issue 5

Franca Patrizi*1, Anna Maria Polifemo1, Cecilia Binda2, Shyam Dang3 and Vincenzo Cennamo1

  • Author Information Open or Close
    • 1Colon Unit, AUSL Bologna, Italy
    • 2Department of Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology Division, Policlinico “A. Gemelli” Hospital, Rome, Italy
    • 3University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA

    *Corresponding author: Franca Patrizi, Colon Unit, AUSL Bologna, Italy

Received: February 20, 2018;   Published: February 27, 2018

DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2018.02.000805

Full Text PDF

To view the Full Article   Peer-reviewed Article PDF


Colonoscopy is one of the most performed procedures in gastroenterology practice and is the criterion standard for colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention, used either for primary or secondary screening. The efficacy of colonoscopy and the preventive effect are highly dependent on the quality of the examination. Complete and accurate reporting of colonoscopy parameters is essential to assess the quality of the procedure and its improvements over time. Moreover, comprehensive reporting analyses can identify possible causes of shortfalls and direct specific training or education projects to achieve the maximum benefit from colonoscopic procedures [1-3].

Starting from the publication of guidelines on reporting practice in 2007 [4] many studies have focused the attention on quality evaluation and quality improvement of colonoscopy reporting, in screening programs or daily clinical practice [5-7]. Computerized reporting programs with mandatory text fields have been demonstrated to easily improve the quality of reporting [8,9]. Also, educational intervention was successful in improving reporting of lowest compliance quality indicators [10,11]. In our study we applied the PolaRis system, a new computerized system with compulsory items that obliged endoscopists to report an essential set of structured items, including key quality indicators. We aimed at demonstrating that forcing compliance to quality indicator reporting translates not only in higher quality in documentation practice but also in intervention on the endoscopist based on psychological and educational traits, resulting in a higher number of colonoscopies considered adequate for bowel cleaning.

Abbreviations: CRC: colorectal Cancer; ADR: Adenoma Detection Rate; ESGE: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; PDR: Polyp detection rate; SPR: suboptimal preparation rates

Abstract| Materials and Methods| Results| Discussion| Limitations| References|